Do any of you feel that either Marx's or Sartre's philosophies could be viewed as a social science?

Question

Explain why you think so

Answer 1

Marx yes, as he was interested in the masses. He saw the injustice of his time and came up with a solution. Too bad Communisum goes against human nature. "To each according to his needs, From each according to his abilities" doesn't work, most people are too greedy.
Sartre was more of a talker. I could use Emerson as an example. He talked the talk, but it took Thoreau to walk the walk.

Answer 2

Yes, and they are in sociology. They were covered in my theories in sociology class. We studied Marx's division and alienation of labor and Sartre's principles of existentialism. I remember more about Marx though than I do about Sartre. But all philosophy theories that try to explain the human condition are also a part of the social sciences because philosophy of the human condition is the foundation from which we start when explaining the constructs of societies - why they evolve in certain directions, how they differ from each other, how they are the same, and how they affect individuals within a given society.

Answer 3

Marx's philosophy of the breakdown of capitalism and its transformation by revolutionary means could be regarded as a branch of social science since the revolutionary elites in a number of countries (pre-eminently Russia and China) tried it as active social experiments with their peoples. Indeed, their experiments make communism more of a social science than many theories that are within the social science canon but have yet to be experimentally tested and either proved or falsified.

Sartre's philosophy of existentialism is, however, more of a zeitgeist - an individual way of looking at the world - and is related, philosophically, to logical solipsism. This cannot be placed on any kind of scientific basis since it is a belief and incapable of being proved or falsified.

Answer 4

The idea of a 'social science' in itself is problematic. Mass human behavior does not conform to models. Without that basic concept a 'science' in a real scene in problematic.

Regarding Marx, his analysis is structured on an outmoded Romantic metaphysics derived from Hegel. His categories are also too broad. Further, groups do not always act in accord with his predicate of 'class interests' consistently. Sarte was a Leftist and basically was of the Marxist mold so far as I understand. What I have read of his is no sociology proper so that last statement take with a grain of salt.

Answer 5

In that our own philosophical views affect our social behavior, yes, both are social science to an extent. Most philosophy is.

Answer 6

Marx tried, but basing your ideas on visits to Manchester wth your rich daddy doesn't really count.
I think rap is more social science

Answer 7

No. Their views are a bit to extreme.

Answer 8

Hmmm, tricky. But on the whole I'd have to say, maybe.

Answer 9

I am not very keen

Answer 10

never heard of it...